Assembly approves putting temporary mid‑decade congressional maps to California ballot; lawmakers debate cost and independence of redistricting process

The California State Assembly voted to place Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8 (ACA 8) on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot, approving a one‑time, temporary mid‑decade congressional redistricting measure aimed at letting voters decide whether to adopt new legislative maps. The roll call showed 57 ayes and 20 noes; the clerk recorded, “The measure passes. The measure is adopted.”

The measure and a related bill, Senate Bill 280, which lawmakers said would set the statutory framework and reimburse counties for the cost of a November special election, drew hours of sharply divided debate on the Assembly floor. Supporters said ACA 8 gives Californians the final say in response to mid‑decade redistricting actions in other states; opponents said the measure circumvents the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and risks costly litigation and budgetary strain.

Assemblymember David Berman, presenting ACA 8 on behalf of Speaker Rivas, framed the measure as a choice for voters. “California voters, not elected officials, will make the final decision,” Assemblymember Berman said. He described the proposal as a response to recent actions in Texas and other states and urged members to allow Californians to “weigh in” on whether to adopt the temporary maps.

Opponents repeatedly raised constitutional and fiscal concerns. Assemblymember Kevin Gallagher argued that “fighting fire with fire is the problem,” urging caution about suspending established processes, and warned against eroding a system Californians created to keep politics out of map drawing. Assemblymember Joe DeMaio called the effort “a political stunt, an unnecessary, costly special election,” and criticized lawmakers for moving the proposal through the legislature rather than pursuing a citizens’ initiative.

Sponsors said SB 280 contains the administrative steps needed for a timely election and includes provisions to reimburse counties for costs. Assemblymember Ken Pellerin, presenting SB 280, said the bill would “ensure counties are made whole for the cost of conducting this special election” and urged colleagues to trust county elections officials’ ability to run the vote.

Multiple assemblymembers emphasized the stakes they tied to national policy developments. Supporters cited federal budget and policy actions they said threaten health care, education and other services, arguing the map question is a defensive step. Opponents focused on the process and costs: some members cited estimates in the hundreds of millions of dollars and warned that the state faces long‑term structural budget shortfalls.

On SB 280, the Assembly considered and repeatedly voted on procedural amendments. Several amendment packages were “laid on the table” (a procedural action to set aside proposed changes) by majority votes: recorded tallies included 48 ayes/19 noes, 55 ayes/19 noes, 55 ayes/19 noes, and 53 ayes/19 noes at different points as members moved through sets of amendments and motions.

Supporters said the ultimate decision on ACA 8 would still rest with voters, and that a November ballot measure would preserve transparency by sending maps to the electorate. Opponents said the short timeline, last‑minute changes and limited public review undermined the independent commission model adopted by voters in 2010 and risked disenfranchising communities of interest.

The Assembly’s final vote to adopt ACA 8 followed more than two hours of debate during which dozens of members spoke for and against the proposal. After the clerk closed the roll, the official tally was Ayes 57, Noes 20; the presiding officer announced the measure adopted and ordered transmittal to the Senate. SB 280 remained on the daily file for further action; members voted in favor of laying multiple amendment sets on the table as part of that process.

Those in favor said the ballot measure returns the ultimate decision to voters and responds to what they called an urgent national threat to fair representation. Those opposed said the Assembly should not reassert map‑drawing power it ceded to the Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2010, and warned about the financial and administrative cost of a special election and likely legal challenges.

What’s next: With ACA 8 adopted by the Assembly, the measure proceeds to the Senate for consideration; SB 280 remains under Assembly consideration to establish the statutory mechanics and funding for the special election. If both houses finalize the package, the question will appear on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot, where voters will decide whether to adopt the temporary mid‑decade congressional maps referenced by ACA 8.

Votes at a glance

- ACA 8 (Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8): Adopted by the Assembly — Ayes 57, Noes 20. Outcome: measure to be transmitted to the Senate for further action and, if enacted, placed on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot.

- SB 280 (implementing statute for special election/county reimbursement): Committee of the whole considered multiple amendment sets; several amendment packages were laid on the table by recorded votes (48–19; 55–19; 55–19; 53–19). Final passage of SB 280 was pending further legislative action in the transcript provided.

Reporting note: Quotes and vote tallies are taken from the Assembly floor transcript. Speakers are identified by their names and titles as they appeared on the floor during debate.